On Tue, 15 Feb 1994, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Jipson Art asked for more info on my assertion that NYC has a lower crime
> rate than suburbs gone wild like Dallas and Atlanta, and that there is no
> relation between pop density and crime. Here are the details.
Doug,
The problem with your table is (to be a sociologist for a minute), I
don't trust the validity of crime statistics between different cities.
Murder rates are relatively reliable, although even that can be
problematic at times. Do police departments treat homicide, manslaughter
and "accidents" in the exact same way? What crimes are pursued or even
reported vary based on the racial breakdown of the cops and the
communities served. Another issue is how crime effects most in the
community. DC is known for having a high murder rate, but most of the
murders are concentrated in the drug trade against other criminals, which
is different from some other cities where murder effects the rest of the
population more directly.
The bottom line is whether higher crime rates in Atlanta or Dallas
reflect more crimes or a higher willingness to report crimes to the police?
The city of Berkeley where I live has the highest rate of felonies per
capita in the state. It is a rather dangerous city but this may also
reflect the rather abnormal (but generally non-lethal) outbreaks of riots
on Telegraph Avenue.
I would say that it is a fair statement that the majority of crimes are
not reported to the police, especially crimes that are between gangs or
others involved in criminal activity. (The low crime rate in LA is
awfully suspicious on this point). Given this, while statistics are
always useful, crime stats have to be taken with a bit of skepticism.
Crime, even murder, is not a homogeneous category and the left needs to
challenge the numerical game of measuring crime. Crime is an intangible
in people's lives that harms their sense of security, or freedom, and
hope for the future (not to different or unrelated to the effects of
capitalism as a whole). It is also part of a social process that
simplistic solutions like "three strikes and you're out" focused on those
numbers will inevitable miss.
I caught Jerry Brown on C-SPAN (where they were filming his new radio
show). He did an amazingly good job of challenging the idiocy of the
current hysteria over "three strikes" while focusing on jobs, opportunity
and hope. He even had on a woman involved in the East Bay Conservation
Corps to embody his alternative, all without sounding "soft." One of the
best lines he gave was noting that when he was governor, he beat his
breast as much as anyone over crime and increased sentences and so on,
prison populations soared, yet crime increased. Jerry does a great
"sinner redeemed" routine in his populist attacks. It may be worth
catching his show.
--Nathan Newman
